1/4% Tax on all stock trades pushed in NY Times today
- Thread starter seasideheights
- Start date
Quote from lindq:
"...Transaction fees like this have long existed in other countries. For example, the United Kingdom charges a tax of 0.25 percent on the purchase or sale of share of stock. "
I see red everytime I see this about the U.K.
As if the British economy is something to be held up as a standard of excellence?
The US proposal goes a lot further than the UK 0.5% 'stamp duty' because the US tax woud cover forex, futures, options, i.e. all financial transactions. And the UK tax isn't applicable to market makers etc. so the revenue raised for the Government is small fry. Essentially the UK tax is a tax on the little guy who wants to trade/invest, as a result day traders tend to trade futures or forex.
Sheer madness if this bill goes through. The similarities with the 1930s anti protectionist measures that were unveiled after the 1929 Great Crash are uncanny. Then there was a public call for 'anti trade between nations', now it is 'anti financial trade '. Spot the difference, both equal "putting some sand in the wheels of capitalism". Even Russia is against it ffsake!
I think this is one of the major points that needs to be emphasized - adopting a financial transaction tax would be repeating the mistakes of the 1930s with a different flavour. The result would be the same, a Depression...
A little on the traders tax and the EPI proposal from Investors Business Daily
http://www.investors.com/NewsAndAnalysis/Article.aspx?id=514000
Democrats kept the jobs problem on the back burner as they strived to cook up health care reform. But with unemployment over 10%, the issue is boiling over and commanding the attention of the top chef.
Yet when President Obama hosts a Thursday summit with economists, business and union leaders, he may find the menu of options for sparking job creation too rich.
Among those is a new plan from the liberal Economic Policy Institute (EPI) with a first-year cost of $400 billion that could be paid for over time with a new 0.5% tax on transactions involving stocks and other financial products.
...
Trading Tax, TARP Funds
Although the EPI plan has a financing source and could theoretically fit, both Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi have expressed some wariness about the transaction tax idea.
What's more, trying to pass a tax on stock trades could bog down efforts to pass an emergency jobs bill, said Daniel Clifton, head of policy research at Strategas Research Partners.
Such a tax "is way too complicated to get something done on a quick basis," Clifton said.
http://www.investors.com/NewsAndAnalysis/Article.aspx?id=514000
Democrats kept the jobs problem on the back burner as they strived to cook up health care reform. But with unemployment over 10%, the issue is boiling over and commanding the attention of the top chef.
Yet when President Obama hosts a Thursday summit with economists, business and union leaders, he may find the menu of options for sparking job creation too rich.
Among those is a new plan from the liberal Economic Policy Institute (EPI) with a first-year cost of $400 billion that could be paid for over time with a new 0.5% tax on transactions involving stocks and other financial products.
...
Trading Tax, TARP Funds
Although the EPI plan has a financing source and could theoretically fit, both Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi have expressed some wariness about the transaction tax idea.
What's more, trying to pass a tax on stock trades could bog down efforts to pass an emergency jobs bill, said Daniel Clifton, head of policy research at Strategas Research Partners.
Such a tax "is way too complicated to get something done on a quick basis," Clifton said.
Good article. Their is no way the tax would be implemented as part of a jobs bill, because the GOP, and even some conservative Dems. would employ stall/blocking tactics if it included the tax. This would hurt the Democrats that want this bill passed immediately. So, there is no way the tax will be a part of this job bill.
Over these next 12 months, the liberal Democrats, and their interest groups are going to try like hell to get this tax passed, because after the elections in Nov. 2010, they know their going to take a beating, and will no longer have the majorities in Congress they currently have to get this done. If we can all hang tough, and continue to write our reps. in Congress, and lobby against this tax, we can win, and stop this from happening.
Its funny how the proponents of these tax ideas all seem to call the .25 or .5% rates "insignificant", considering that the interest rates paid by savings and money-market accounts are generally in the same "insignificant" range. So I can pull my brokerage funds, stop my evil speculating, and then watch as it takes an entire year to make back the tax $$ from one single stock transaction. In the meantime, the bank who allows me the privilege of loaning it $$, will turn around and lend the $$ out for 20 or 30% to some poor bastard who is probably racking up all kinds of other over-limit and late fees to boot.
What we need to silence these politicians for a while is decent improvement in the jobs numbers & no double dip recession. A double dip at this time would not be good for our cause.
With that said, we continue to fight on.
With that said, we continue to fight on.
Geithner interview Fox Business News Thursday Afternoon.
From the above NYT article:
Lawmakers are considering other ways to pay for the measure without threatening the shaky economic recovery. Highway construction, for example, could start quickly but be paid for through measures that would take effect in several years when the economy is healthier, said Democratic Rep. Betty Sutton, co-chair of a House task force set up to consider proposals.
Just an FYI - Betty Sutton was (is) a co sponsor of Defazio's HR 1068 Transaction tax bill. I don't like her line about paying for stuff several years down the road - thats sounds similar to the EPI's suggestion of having the transaction tax start after a (3) year period.
-Guru
True, but in order for this tax to pass, it would need every Democrat and Independent in the Senate to vote yes to overcome a guaranteed Republican filibuster. They would need 60 votes. There's no way they'll get 60 votes, as there are at least 3-4 Senate Democrats (possibly more), opposed to any transaction tax.
I really think all the lobbying being done by these liberal groups is to pressure the administration to change their stance on this tax via the G-20. I think they know they face very long odds getting any trans. tax passed through Congress, but their odds are better in possibly getting something accomplished in the next G-20 summit. That's what we need to be worried about, as the U.S., Russia, and Canada are the only significant countries left that continue to oppose the tax. I'm much more concerned about this becoming a reality internationally than domestically.